Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-16345
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 25 November 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Jearl
Margaritha
COMPOSITION:
Lívia SILVA KÄGI (Brazil & Switzerland), Deputy Chairwoman
Michele COLUCCI (Italy), Member
Jorge GUTIÉRREZ (Costa Rica), Member
CLAIMANT:
Sabah FK, Azerbaijan
Represented by Sila International Lawyers
FIRST RESPONDENT:
Jearl Margaritha, Netherlands
SECOND RESPONDENT:
Phoenix Rising FC, USA
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-16345
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 27 June 2023, the Azerbaijani club Sabah FK (hereinafter: Sabah or the Claimant) and the
Dutch player Jearl Margaritha (hereinafter: the Player or the First Respondent) entered an
employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from 1 July 2023 until 30 June 2027.
2.
Art. 4 of the Contract established inter alia the following obligations for the Player (quoted
verbatim):
“4.1.1. Comply with team principles and rules and play honestly at held football games
while representing “Sabah Football Club” as a football player;
[...]
4.1.10. To follow trainer’s instructions during practice exercises, be prepared for held football
competitions as a sportsman, demonstrate earned habits individually and collectively during
football competitions;
4.1.11 To behave ethically towards persons participating in practice exercises and competitions,
as well as the audience;
[…]
4.1.15. Follow internal disciplines of the Club and pay fines in the violation cases of these
disciplines, as it described in administrative act of the club that the Player will also sign;
4.1.16 Accept direction of the Player to the second team of the Club upon decision of the
Coaching staff;
[...]
4.1.18. Strictly comply with the Code of Conduct approved by the Club. The Parties agree that in
case of breach of the Code of Conduct, the Player may be sanctioned in accordance with the
Code.”
3.
Pursuant to art. 5 of the Contract, Sabah undertook to pay the Player the following
amounts:
−
2023/2024 season
o
o
EUR 30,000 net payable no later than 30 days after the Player was issued a
work permit and opened a bank account.
EUR 10,000 net per month from July through June, payable no later than 15
days from the end of the relevant month.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-16345
−
2024/2025 season
o
o
−
2025/2026 season
o
o
−
If the Player participated in no less than 70% of first team matches in the
previous season:
▪ EUR 40,000 net payable on or before 30 June 2024
▪ EUR 11,666.67 net per month from July through June, payable no later
than 15 days from the end of the relevant month.
If the Player participated in less than 70% of first team matches in the
previous season, then he would receive the same amount he received in the
prior season.
2026/2027 season
o
o
4.
If the Player participated in no less than 50% of first team matches in the
previous season:
▪ EUR 40,000 net payable on or before 30 June 2024
▪ EUR 10,000 net per month from July through June, payable no later
than 15 days from the end of the relevant month.
If the Player participated in less than 50% of first team matches in the
previous season:
▪ EUR 30,000 net payable on or before 30 June 2024
▪ EUR 10,000 net per month from July through June, payable no later
than 15 days from the end of the relevant month.
If the Player participated in no less than 70% of first team matches in the
previous season:
▪ EUR 50,000 net payable on or before 30 June 2024
▪ EUR 12,500 net per month from July through June, payable no later
than 15 days from the end of the relevant month.
If the Player participated in less than 70% of first team matches in the
previous season, then he would receive the same amount he received in the
prior season.
According to the evidence furnished by Sabah, the Player engaged in the following
behaviour and elicited the following responses from the Club:
−
−
13 February 2024 – Player abandoned training session without permission and was
issued a warning, citing art. 4.1.18 of the Contract.
9 March 2024 – Player broke a GPS tracker and was issued a warning, citing art.
4.1.18 of the Contract.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-16345
−
−
−
−
26 March 2024 – Player engaged in disrespectful behaviour towards the Head Coach
and was sanctioned with a 10% deduction from his income, citing art. 4.1.18 of the
Contract.
28 March 2024 – Player engaged in disrespectful behaviour towards a teammate
and was issued a warning, citing art. 4.1.18 of the Contract.
3 April 2024 – Player engaged in disrespectful behaviour towards a teammate and
was issued a warning, citing art. 4.1.18 of the Contract.
6 April 2024 – Player engaged in disrespectful behaviour towards the coaching staff
during a match and was sanctioned with a 10% deduction from his income, citing
art. 4.1.18 of the Contract.
5.
On 9 April 2024, Sabah sent the above-referenced letters to the Player and directed the
Player to the second team until 8 May 2024.
6.
Upon receiving a message from the Player that he was ill and would not attend training,
the evidence on file - consisting of a letter issued by the Club on 10 April 2024 - indicates
that Sabah’s team doctor and an emergency team checked in on the Player and no sign of
illness was established. For the sake of clarity, the letter was not accompanied by any
additional documentation and was signed by the Club’s CEO. Sabah informed the Player as
much in writing, indicating that he was not prevented from performing his duties and that
his absence was without just cause, and urging him to attend the second team training the
next day.
7.
On 11 April 2024, Sabah sent the Player correspondence stating that he failed to attend the
second team’s training session without providing the club reasonable grounds for doing so
and informing that they were imposing a sanction consisting of a 15% deduction from his
salary. Sabah further urged the Player to appear in the following training session.
8.
On 12, 13, 14, 19, and 20 April 2024, Sabah sent correspondence to the Player whereby it
inter alia reminded the Player of his duty to comply with the Contract and noted his absence
from training sessions.
9.
On 15 April 2024, Sabah sent the Player a letter concerning his absence from a match with
the second team and inter alia imposed a sanction of 25% salary deduction from the
Player’s monthly salary.
10. On 21 April 2024, Sabah sent the Player a letter concerning his absence from pre-match
training and indicating that he did not travel with the second team to participate in an away
match the following day, without reason. Sabah inter alia imposed a 35% salary deduction
from the Player’s monthly salary.
11. In reply, on 22 April 2024, the Player, via his legal representative, sent correspondence to
Sabah whereby the Player expressed disagreement with the warnings and fines imposed
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-16345
as they were based on “groundless accusations.” Specifically, the Player indicated the
following:
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
He was not present during practice on 13 February 2024 due to injury.
He did not purposefully break a GPS tracker but was nonetheless willing to cover
the cost if it was broken because of his fault or negligence (which should, in any
event, be proven with evidence).
During practice, the coach became angry and verbal towards the Player, gave him
“a little push” and told him to leave the pitch. The Player requested the video of the
training session and indicated that he left the training at the coach’s request.
He requested the video recording of the trainings where he was supposedly
disrespectful to his teammates, Ruslan Samigulin and Emmanuel Apeh, to show that
it did not happen.
He acknowledged that he expressed his disagreement to his substitution during a
match, but denied having been disrespectful to the coach.
He asked for clarification of all facts with evidence of the alleged disciplinary
violations, and requested that Sabah submit the Internal Code of Conduct
(Disciplinary Code) that was deemed as having been signed and accepted by the
Player.
He noted that the violations were not reported immediately or shortly after the
alleged incidents occurred, but that the notices were all sent on the same day with
the same date of issuance (9 April 2024), presumed to be with the intention of
considering the Player breached the Contract.
The punishments imposed by Sabah were within a very short period of time,
excessive, and disproportionate. The withholding of 45% of the Player’s salary for 3
consecutive days impacted the Player financially and mentally.
The coach had no valid reason to exclude the Player from first team trainings and
matches and send him to the second team. This decision was to punish the Player
and force him to unilaterally terminate the Contract.
Sending the Player to the second team was not acceptable according to FIFA and
CAS jurisprudence, and the Player could not agree to it unless it was for a maximum
of 1 week and the reasons for sending him were supported by evidence, the Player
was paid in full, it was temporary, and the necessary training conditions were the
same as the first team.
12. On 25 April 2024, Sabah sent correspondence to the Player, referencing his purportedly
unacceptable attitude towards the coaching staff and proposing a meeting in order to
resolve the matter. Sabah also indicated that, due to the Player’s absence from training for
several weeks, he would have to train with the second team to “reinstate his fitness.”
Nevertheless, Sabah indicated that “should the Player (1) demonstrate impeccable compliance
with the Club’s directions, (2) apologize for the inappropriate behavior before the coaches and
teammates to normalize relationships (which the Club is ready to assist in) and (3) agree to serve
the financial sanctions imposed until today, the Club does not observe the obstacles to reinstate
the Player as a member of the first team.”
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-16345
13. On 26 April 2024, the Player, via his legal representative, sent a letter to Sabah whereby it
rejected Sabah’s allegations once again, requested evidence of such allegations, and
argued that one of the reasons for the Player’s exclusion from the first team was to hinder
the triggering of his higher salary level for the following season. The Player further rejected
the terms proposed for his reinstatement and reiterated that the deductions from his
salary were illegal and that he should be reinstated to the first team immediately.
14. According to the evidence on file, Sabah and the Player’s legal representative attempted to
hold a meeting on 26 April 2024, but Sabah’s subsequent email to the Player and his legal
representative that day at 7:30PM indicated the meeting was canceled by the Player’s legal
representative.
15. On 5 May 2024, Sabah sent the Player a letter sharing a link for downloading videos, where
Sabah maintained that some of the Player’s allegedly inappropriate behaviour was
recorded; the rest could be confirmed by witnesses Moreover, Sabah justified its position
and the measures applied, denying that the Player could have triggered the increased
salary level foreseen in his Contract for the following season and providing its calculations
for such conclusion. Sabah also invited the Player to a training session with the first team
on 6 May 2024 at 10h.
16. On 7 May 2025, Sabah sent a letter to the Player indicating that he was absent from the
two training sessions with the first team that took place on 6 May 2024 and that it had
learned from his landlord that he was absent from his home. As such, Sabah requested
information about the Player’s whereabouts from 15 April to 7 May 2024. Furthermore,
Sabah requested that the Player arrive at the club’s premises and perform his obligations
under the Contract no later than 10 May 2024.
17. Sabah also furnished messages, apparently exchanged on the messaging application
WhatsApp, alleged to be from 7 May 2024 and purportedly between the Player and his
landlord, whereby the Player stated that he had arrived home and could not open the door,
to which the landlord replied that he had changed the lock, that he had apparently
contacted the police, and that he worried about the Player’s life.
18. According to the evidence on file, the Player apparently resumed his duties on 8 May 2024.
19. On 9 May 2024, Sabah sent a letter to the Player indicating that, after his training session
with the rehab coach on 8 May 2024, his fitness level was deemed insufficient and that, in
order to recover his physical fitness, Sabah ordered the Player to conduct training sessions
and participate in matches with the second team until 31 May 2024, pursuant to art. 4.1.16
of the Contract. Sabah also informed that the second team’s next training session was
scheduled for 10 May 2024.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-16345
20. Also on 9 May 2024, the Player sent a letter to Sabah requesting a copy of the
corresponding report regarding the Player’s physical fitness, which was mentioned in the
club’s prior correspondence, as well as reports on the physical fitness status of the other
players in the club in order to compare. The Player further requested his immediate
reinstatement with the first team, noted that the club had outstanding amounts due the
Player, and granted the club 10 days to pay the following:
−
−
−
AZN 9,053 – April 2024 salary
AZN 2,105 – housing allowance
AZN 3,087 – rehabilitation costs incurred by the Player in the “FIFA medical centre in
Dubai”
21. In reply, on 10 May 2024, Sabah sent a letter whereby it stated that it could not provide
data on other players as it was confidential and that there was no need for any other report
on the Player’s fitness. Sabah further reminded the Player that he was ordered to train and
compete with the second team until 31 May 2024 and reiterated its request for information
on the Player’s whereabouts from 15 April to 7 May 2024. Finally, Sabah denied owing any
amounts of remuneration and housing allowance to the Player, and stated that all
necessary travel, accommodation, and medical costs were covered by the club, with any
other expenses being outside the club’s responsibilities.
22. In a separate correspondence to the Player sent on 11 May 2024, Sabah provided him with
images of the tests conducted on 8 May 2024.
23. On 12 May 2024, the Player sent another correspondence to Sabah noting inter alia the
following:
−
−
−
−
−
31 May as the date of reinstatement was too far away, and that he should be
reinstated within 7 working days of receiving that letter.
Accusing the club of creating unhealthy working conditions for the Player, as the
physical test results shared with him could not be compared with other players.
He was never provided proof of the allegations made against the Player or a copy
of the internal disciplinary rules signed by the Player. Therefore, his right of defense
was not respected.
The club still had outstanding amounts towards the Player and was under a deadline
to remit payment.
The club’s actions of deducting from his salary and forcibly evicting him were meant
to force the Player to unilaterally terminate his Contract.
24. On 17 May 2024, Sabah sent a letter whereby it essentially reiterated its position from its
letter dated 10 May 2024.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-16345
25. On 22 May 2024, the Player sent a letter referring to art. 12bis of the FIFA Regulations on
the Status and Transfer of Players and demanding payment of the amounts previously
claimed by him and his immediate reinstatement to the first team.
26. Sabah also provided messages from unspecified dates where the Player apparently
indicated to Sabah the following (quoted verbatim):
“[…] communications to go trough my legal representatives. It’s a shame it has all come to a
point where it seems impossible for the club’s ownership and management to speak to my
management about possible soloutions. It’s very clear the club both coach… [redacted].
Hello ramin
How are u?
I hear that clubs are calling and asking for me but ur turning them down or give them a feeling
I’m not available
I want to leave like I already said a couple times
So keep al the options open please
Thankyou”.
27. On 18 June 2024, Sabah sent a letter to the Player requesting his presence to start training
camp on 21 June 2024 at 17h.
28. According to the evidence on file, there is an undated WhatsApp message from an
unidentified number, alleged to be the Player writing to Sabah’s coach, whereby the Player
stated the following (quoted verbatim):
“Goodmorning coach
I wanted to speak with u about the upcoming season
I want to leave
Reason why is because I don’t have the feeling that u want to work with me and that we can’t
work together again after everything that had happened
Also I’m not a player for the bench and ur putting me there u even send me to the 2nd team so
I can’t bring up the will to play for u if ur putting me there
I don’t see the point in joining the pre season now because I don’t wanna be there
So I will say it again I want to leave and I don’t want to be [rest of message not provided]”
29. Sabah provided further evidence consisting of undated WhatsApp messages from a
contact named “Carlos Agent” to a contact named “Ramin,” whereby several points were
mentioned (quoted verbatim):
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-16345
“[rest of message not provided] miscommunication regarding planning a meeting with each
other. We are ready now to do the meeting, could you please make some time to have the
meeting so that we can discuss a clear solution for this situation?
Ramin, we hereby like to confirm you that the ones who will attend this meeting tomorrow will
be Jearl’s family (dad&uncle), me, Jearl and one of his lawyers.
Hope to have you informed you as well. Many thanks in advance.
You want a loan feeeee for Jearl?????
The clubs that Jearl wants to go to can not even pay the full salary he has in Sabah. So loan fee
is no option
They will cover his salary and he will drop his salary. So the 100K you save per year is the loan
fee
What is the problem?
Because you and me both know with this coach Jearl is not going to play for Sabah
You want him in the stands for 100K per year?
Or in second team for 100K per year?
Decreasing marketvalue?
Be realistic”
Other evidence provided by Sabah identified Ramin Hasanov as Sabah’s CEO.
30. Allegedly, on 22 June 2024, the Player sent a letter to Sabah mentioning the following:
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
A video call had been held, where there was a “desire to resolve the current situation.”
No substantial evidence was provided regarding the accusations made against the
Player.
No contact was established with the head coach, who should express his position
regarding the Player’s future with the first team, referencing “unworkable relations
raised between the head coach and Margaritha.”
Requesting evidence of the accusations against the Player, or their withdrawal due
to lack of evidence.
Requesting written confirmation of the cancellation of all sanctions imposed on the
Player.
Requesting immediate payment of all debts to the Player.
Requesting payment of all amounts for the 2024-2025 season according to the
Contract, specifically referencing the EUR 30,000 payment due on 30 June 2024.
Requesting payment of the Player’s agent’s commission for the 2024/2025 season.
Requesting a video call with the head coach to discuss matters, adding that the
participation of club and player representative was mandatory.
In case the Player had no future with Sabah for the season, for the Player to be
loaned out for free and for his full salary to be paid.
Granting a deadline until 30 June 2024 for Sabah to comply with the above.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-16345
31. On 23 and 25 June 2024, Sabah sent letters to the Player noting that he failed to appear at
training camp and requesting his presence as soon as possible.
32. On 27 June 2024, Sabah sent a letter to the Player in reply to his correspondence from 22
June 2024, stating as follows:
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
The previous sanctions imposed on the Player remained in force due to the Player’s
breaches, and sharing a link purportedly containing video files that were mentioned
in the prior video call.
The club had no debts towards the Player, and the medical expenses were covered
by the club.
The controversies between the Player and the head coach did not preclude the fact
that the Player was employed by Sabah and must comply with his obligations under
the Contract
Sabah saw no need to organize a video call as the matter could be discussed in
person during the training camp.
Any potential transfer of the Player would be considered in light of the club’s
interests.
Payments under Sabah’s agreements with the Player and/or his agent would be
exercised in due course.
Reiterating that the Player had not yet appeared in the training camp and urging
him to join the camp by no later than 30 June 2024, offering assistance with travel
documents. Sabah further stated that, should the Player not comply, the club would
consider it as the Player’s refusal to comply with the Contract and may decide to
unilaterally terminate the Contract with just cause.
33. On 28 and 29 June 2024, Sabah sent letters to the Player noting that he failed to appear at
training camp and requesting his presence as soon as possible, but no later than 30 June
2025.
34. Allegedly, on 2 July 2024, the Player sent a letter to Sabah acknowledging that no payment
had been made on the allegedly outstanding amounts or the lump sum payment due, and
that no dialogue had been established between the head coach and the Player. Therefore,
the Player would only join Sabah’s training camp if the club paid the outstanding amounts
and established dialogue between the Player and the head coach regarding his future (and
with the participation of the Player’s official representative and the club’s senior
management).
35. On 2 July 2024, Sabah sent the Player a letter whereby it reiterated its previous stance on
the Player’s absences, the alleged debt toward the Player, and the obligation to fulfill the
Contract, including a request to appear at the training camp as soon as possible.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-16345
36. On 4 July 2024, Sabah sent the Player a letter whereby it noted that the Player had been
absent from the club for almost 2 weeks and that, due to this, the club had to evaluate the
Player’s medical and fitness condition. Therefore, Sabah requested that he travel to Baku
to complete a medical exam organized by the club.
37. At some point between 2 and 6 July 2024, the Player arrived at Sabah’s training camp in
Garabala, Slovenia.
38. The parties exchanged multiple correspondence on 6 July 2024, namely:
−
−
−
−
−
Sabah sent a letter to the Player stating that he had arrived “arbitrarily and without
permission or at least notification” to Slovenia, where the training camp was being
held. Sabah mentioned that the Player had been absent from camp for 2 weeks, in
addition to missing a significant number of trainings in April-May, and then being
on vacation from the end of May until the start of camp. Therefore, Sabah
maintained that it had “more than just a reasonable doubt that [his] condition allows
[him] to withstand the amount of work provided to the team at the camp” and that it
could not conduct a check-up in Slovenia. As such, Sabah urged the Player to arrive
in Baku for the medical exam and provided him with flight tickets for that same
evening. This letter from Sabah was sent via email to the Player and his legal
representative at 11:24am on Saturday, 6 July 2024. The flight ticket provided
(Zagreb-Istanbul-Baku) departed on 6 July 2024 at 20:25.
The Player sent Sabah a letter alleging that he arrived in Slovenia but was told in
conversation by the club’s manager to go to Baku, at the direction of the head coach.
The Player noted that the head coach refused to have a conversation in person with
the Player, and that there was a FIFA-accredited medical center in Maribor, Slovenia
where Sabah could coordinate the preseason medical tests. The Player also noted
that he participated in 2 World Cup qualifying matches with Curaçao on 6 and 9 June
2024, which spoke to his good physical condition. Finally, the Player noted that
Sabah had not complied with its financial obligations under the Contract.
The Player also sent a letter to Sabah citing the Contract and stating that there was
no reason for the Player to have to go to Baku for his medical exam when it could
be conducted in Maribor, in addition to referencing the club’s obligations under the
Contract towards the Player and stating that there was an unworkable condition
between the coach and the Player, which violated the Player’s natural rights to train
and play football on a professional level.
Sabah sent a letter to the Player inter alia rejecting the Player’s position and ordering
him to travel to Baku with the flight tickets provided to attend the medical exam.
The Player sent Sabah a default notice, claiming the following amounts and granting
a deadline of 15 days to remit payment:
o EUR 20,000 (April and June 2024 salaries),
o EUR 30,000 (new season down payment)
o EUR 1,500 (medical expenses incurred in Dubai)
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-16345
39. On 9 July 2024, Sabah sent the Player a letter whereby it inter alia referenced the Player’s
absences and the lack of information as to the Player’s whereabouts. Said letter also
referenced a meeting held via Zoom on 18 June 2024 where Sabah stated the Player was
disrespectful towards the club’s management, and further stated that the Player “submitted
insulting and provocative messages to the Head coach and the representatives of the Club via
WhatsApp, which is unacceptable in professional football.” In addition, Sabah ordered the
Player to travel to Baku to pass the medical exam without delay and informed him that,
due to his continued absence, the Player was directed to the second team for a period of
1 month as of the date of his successful completion of the medical exam in Baku. Sabah
also stated, among other things, that no salary was due while the Player was absent.
40. On 19 July 2024, Sabah addressed the Player’s default notice. In doing so, Sabah stated that
the April 2024 salary was not due to the Player because he was absent. Moreover, the salary
for June 2024 was not due on the date of the default notice and was instead due on 15 July
2024, and in any case was paid for the period of 1-20 June 2024. As the Player was absent
from 21-30 June 2024, no salary was due. In addition, the lump sum payment of EUR 30,000
would be paid in return for his services; if no services were provided, no payment would
be made. As to the medical expenses, Sabah reiterated that it had already paid all
necessary expenses in advance and was not in a position to cover additional expenses
incurred by the Player arbitrarily and without approval from the club. Finally, Sabah
reiterated that the Player should travel to Baku immediately for the medical exam.
41. On 22 July 2024, both parties sent correspondence:
−
Sabah sent the Player a termination notice whereby it terminated the Contract. In
it, Sabah referenced the following matters, concluding that it was their opinion the
Player had no interest in continuing his relationship with Sabah:
o the Player’s failure to arrive for first team training camp, medical exam or
second team trainings,
o his absence without leave during April and part of May 2024,
o that he was summoned as from 21 June 2024 to Baku for his medical exam
but did not comply,
o that he arrived at the first team training camp location without permission
and when given flights to return to Baku he did not do so,
o that, at that moment, Sabah had no information on the Player’s whereabouts
and he had been missing for a month,
o the Player’s inappropriate behaviour towards teammates, coaching staff,
and club management.
−
The Player sent Sabah a termination notice whereby he stated that he was owed
AZN 14,062 (April salary), EUR 1,500 (medical expenses), and EUR 30,000 (lump sum
payment).
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-16345
42. On 23 July 2024, Sabah sent the Player a letter claiming compensation for breach of
contract in the amount of EUR 750,000 (EUR 450,000 residual value plus EUR 300,000 as
the non-amortised portion of his transfer fee). Sabah requested payment of such amount
within 10 days.
43. According to the information available on the Transfer Matching System (TMS) the
2024/2025 season in Azerbaijan lasted from 2 August 2024 through 8 June 2025.
44. On 12 August 2024, the Player and Phoenix Rising FC (hereinafter: Phoenix Rising or the
Second Respondent) signed an employment contract with a guaranteed term from 10
August 2024 until 30 November 2025. According to such contract, the Player was entitled
to a monthly salary of USD 15,800, payable as from 12 August 2024 until 31 December
2024, and subsequently a monthly salary of USD 12,916.67 payable as from 1 January 2025
until 31 December 2025.
45. According to the information available on TMS, Phoenix Rising and the United States Soccer
Federation requested the Player’s International Transfer Certificate (ITC) on 13 August
2024, and it was delivered by the Azerbaijan Football Association on 17 August 2024, upon
Sabah confirming in writing that it did not object to the issuance of the Player’s ITC.
46. On 17 August 2024, Sabah sent a letter to Phoenix Rising informing them that Sabah had
terminated the Contract with just cause, that the Player was in breach of the Regulations,
and that, in case the Player signed a new contract, Sabah would file a claim before the FIFA
Football Tribunal pursuant to the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
47. On 1 October 2024, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Claimant
48. Sabah lodged a claim for compensation for breach of contract, alleging that it had just
cause to terminate the Contract or, alternatively, the Player did not have just cause to
terminate on 22 July 2024.
Sabah had just cause to terminate
49. As to the matter of sending the Player to the second team, Sabah alleged that they did so
because of the Player’s unethical behaviour toward his teammates and coaching staff.
Moreover, the Contract did not state that the Player could only play for the first team, but
instead stated in art. 4.1.16 that the Player’s obligations included to “Accept direction of the
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-16345
Player to the second team of the Club upon decision of the Coaching staff.” In addition, Sabah
highlighted that it repeatedly stated the Player would be reinstated to the first team as
soon as he “changes his approach to professional activity” (referencing his attitude).
50. As to the matter of the Player’s issues with the head coach, Sabah alleged that the reason
for this was the Player’s own behaviour.
51. In sum, and in reference to its termination notice from 22 July 2024, Sabah highlighted that
the main reasons for the termination were the Player’s long-lasting unauthorized absence
(for a total of 58 days, including 1 month from 21 June to 21 July 2024) and his consistent
noncompliance with various orders and instructions from the club. According to Sabah,
this constituted just cause for termination.
The Player did not have just cause to terminate
52. Conversely, the Player did not have just cause because all deductions of the Player’s salary
were made in strict compliance with the Contract. Sabah implemented more lenient
sanctions than what was foreseen in the Code of Discipline and, in any event, the Player
never appealed the sanctions applied in the 9 April 2024 letters or any other letters.
Furthermore, Sabah contended that it had every right to not pay the Player during the time
he was absent without leave from the club and not rendering his services (citing FIFA and
CAS jurisprudence to this effect).
53. In this sense, Sabah reiterated that the Player was absent for 21 days during April 2024 and
highlighted that the amount requested by the Player – AZN 14,062 or approximately EUR
7,650 – align with the salary due for the period of absence (EUR 10,000 x 21/30 = EUR 7,000).
54. As to the lump sum payment, the same rationale as with the salary applied – Sabah
contended that such payment was part of the Player’s service fee and the Player did not
even begin to render his services for the 2024/2025 season. Therefore, it was not due.
55. As to the medical expenses, art. 3.1.8 of the Contract stipulated that the club would cover
all medical costs related to his treatment in Azerbaijan, and, if the injury required surgery,
the Player would be entitled to request Sabah to reimburse the costs “in one of the European
clinics.” Sabah further indicated that all expenses incurred by the Player during his trip to
Dubai were covered by the club, and Sabah did not give its permission or approval for the
Player to spend additional amounts.
Consequences of termination
56. As to the consequences of its termination with just cause, Sabah submitted that the
Chamber shall consider the residual value of the Contract, the unamortized expenses, and
the specificity of sport in order to calculate the amounts owed to Sabah as compensation
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-16345
for breach of contract under art. 17 of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of
Players in force at the time of filing the claim.
57. The residual value is submitted to be EUR 150,000 net per season for 3 seasons, i.e., EUR
450,000 net.
58. Furthermore, Sabah acquired the Player via transfer agreement with FK Top OSS dated 25
June 2023 for an amount of EUR 400,001, which was to be amortized across the 4 seasons
of the Contract. Therefore, there remained an unamortized portion of the Player’s transfer
fee of EUR 300,000.
59. In addition, the Contract was terminated by the Club in July 2024, at which time the Player
was 23 years old. Thus, it was terminated within the protected period. In light of this and
the fact that the Player acted in bad faith, Sabah submitted it was entitled to a further EUR
60,000 net – 6 months’ salaries.
60. Thus, Sabah claimed a total compensation for breach of contract amounting to EUR
810,000 net, plus 5% interest p.a. as of 23 July 2024.
61. Sabah also argued that sanctions shall apply to both the Player (6 months’ restriction on
playing) and Phoenix Rising, as it was well-informed of the dispute between Sabah and the
Player but nevertheless decided to hire the Player.
62. Therefore, the Claimant’s requests for relief were the following (quoted verbatim):
“VI. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
Based on the foregoing, the Claimant hereby respectfully asks the FIFA DRC to rule as follows:
1. The claim of the Claimant, Football Club Sabah, is accepted.
2. The First Respondent, Mr. Jearl Margaritha, has to pay the Claimant, Football Club Sabah, the
amount of EUR 810,000 (Eight hundred and ten thousand Euro) net plus interest 5% p.a. on this
amount as from the 23 July 2024 until the date of effective payment:
3. The First Respondent, Mr. Jearl Margaritha, is restricted on playing in official matches for 6
(six) months in accordance with Article 17 par. 3 of the FIFA RSTP.
4. The Second Respondent, Football Club Phoenix Rising, is jointly and severally liable for the
payment of compensation in accordance with Article 17 par. 2 of the FIFA RSTP.
5. The Second Respondent, Football Club Rising, is banned from registering any new players,
either nationally or internationally, for two entire and consecutive registration periods in
accordance with Article 17 par. 4 of the FIFA RSTP.”
pg. 16
REF. FPSD-16345
b. Additional Comments from Sabah on the Interim Regulatory Framework
63. In light of the new interim regulatory framework (hereinafter: IRF) adopted by the Bureau
of the FIFA Council on 23 December 2024, on 3 March 2025 the FIFA general secretariat
invited Sabah to amend its claim, if it so wished, exclusively in relation to the possible
consequences of the application of the IRF.
64. In it, Sabah submitted that the IRF shall not have any impact on the dispute. Firstly, the IRF
was not applicable on the basis of tempus regit actum, and instead the June 2024 edition of
the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players shall apply. In doing so, Sabah
referenced art. 26 par. 1 of the IRF, and also referred to jurisprudence from the Court of
Arbitration for Sport and the principle of legal certainty.
c. Reply of the Respondents
65. Despite being invited to do so, neither the First nor the Second Respondents filed a reply
to the claim.
pg. 17
REF. FPSD-16345
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
66. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or DRC) analysed
whether it was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, it took note that
the present matter was presented to FIFA on 1 October 2024 and submitted for decision
on 25 November 2025. Taking into account the wording of arts. 31 and 34 of the January
2025 edition of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the
Procedural Rules), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the
matter at hand.
67. Furthermore, the Chamber referred to art. 2 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and observed
that in accordance with art. 23 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) (July 2025
edition), the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to hear employment-related
dispute with an international dimension between a Dutch player and an Azerbaijani club,
with the involvement of a club from the USA.
68. Subsequently, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, it confirmed that, in accordance with art. 29 of the
Regulations, the July 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand as
to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
69. The Chamber recalled the basic principle of burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 13
par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, according to which a party claiming a right on the basis of
an alleged fact shall carry the respective burden of proof. Likewise, the Chamber stressed
the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which it may consider
evidence not filed by the parties, including without limitation the evidence generated by or
within the Transfer Matching System (TMS).
c. Merits of the dispute
70. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, the Chamber entered
into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Chamber started by acknowledging all
the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file.
However, the Chamber emphasised that in the following considerations it will refer only to
the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which it considered pertinent for
assessing the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
pg. 18
REF. FPSD-16345
71. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that
concerns a claim by a club against a former player and his new club for compensation for
breach of contract under art. 17 of the Regulations.
72. In view of the fact that neither the Player nor Phoenix Rising submitted a reply to the claim,
the Chamber noted that a decision shall be rendered based on the file (cf. art. 21 par. 1 of
the Procedural Rules).
73. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine (i) how the
Contract was terminated and whether this occurred with or without just cause, and (ii) the
consequences that may derive from such conclusion.
74. To begin, the Chamber recalled the long-standing jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal,
according to which only a breach or misconduct which is of a certain severity justifies the
termination of a contract without prior warning. In other words, only when there are
objective criteria which do not reasonably permit to expect the continuation of the
employment relationship between the parties, a contract may be terminated prematurely.
Hence, if there are more lenient measures which can be taken in order for an employer to
assure the employee’s fulfilment of his contractual duties, such measures must be taken
before terminating an employment contract. A premature termination of an employment
contract can only be an ultima ratio measure.
75. In addition, the Chamber recalled that, according to the Regulations, in general, just cause
to terminate an employment contract shall exist in any circumstance in which a party can
no longer reasonably and in good faith be expected to continue a contractual relationship
(cf. art. 14 of the Regulations). The foregoing is in line with the well-established
jurisprudence of this Chamber and CAS.
76. In continuation, the Chamber deemed important to recall that contractual stability is the
backbone of the entire football season, and employers and employees in the football world
are prevented from simply withdrawing from a previous employment relationship without
a valid reason. In this regard, the early termination of an employment contract without just
cause has consequences – both financial and sporting. The rules allow for the parties to
modulate the effects of such a premature termination, but the jurisprudence also sets
certain boundaries to limit the contractual freedom in favour of the legal certainty and the
legitimate expectation of contractual stability.
77. Nevertheless, the Chamber also recalled that a finding of just cause is a fact-specific
analysis and shall be undertaken on a case-by-case basis.
78. Bearing the above principles in mind, and based on the evidence on file, the Chamber then
proceeded to analyse the facts and circumstances leading up to the termination – which,
pg. 19
REF. FPSD-16345
quite tellingly, in the Chamber’s view, was communicated by both parties on the same day,
22 July 2024.
79. From the evidence in the file, it remained uncontested that the Player was sent to train and
play with the second team on 9 April 2024 (as acknowledged by the Player in his
correspondence dated 22 April 2024, where he complained that such exclusion was
without a valid reason and only aimed at punishing the Player).
80. According to the evidence on file, this decision was announced as being a temporary one –
until 8 May 2024 – and was stated to have been premised upon the Player’s alleged prior
disciplinary breaches incurred between 13 February 2024 and 6 April 2024, his decreased
performance, and his alleged actions and attitude toward the coaching staff and
teammates. Moreover, the Chamber noted that, pursuant to the Contract, Sabah indeed
appeared to have discretion to assign the Player to the second team, as determined by the
head coach.
81. However, the Chamber noted that those alleged prior disciplinary breaches underlying
Sabah’s decision to send the Player to the second team, which were said to have occurred
between 13 February 2024 and 6 April 2024, were, per the evidence provided by Sabah
itself, consisted of warnings and the imposition of 2 salary deductions of 10% each (cf. par.
4 above). The Chamber also noted that all these alleged disciplinary breaches were, as per
the documentation on file, communicated altogether and simultaneously on 9 April 2024,
i.e., more than 2 months after the first alleged disciplinary breach and while at the same
time directing the Player to the second team for those alleged breaches.
82. Indeed, it is relevant for the Chamber that the Player, in contemporaneous
communications, objected to the lack of due process in the imposition of the sanctions and
Sabah did not, in the Chamber’s view, provided sufficient evidence that (i) the disciplinary
breaches alleged to have occurred between 13 February 2024 and 6 April 2024 did in fact
occur or (ii) that the imposition of those sanctions announced on 9 April 2024 followed a
due process granting the Player the right to defend himself.
83. Hence, in the absence of conclusive evidence regarding the justification for applying art.
4.1.16 of the Contract via its correspondence dated 9 April 2024 and the Player’s
subsequent exclusion from the first team, the Chamber concluded that such clause was
invoked in an unsubstantiated manner and contrary to the good faith expected from the
parties in the execution of the Contract.
84. The Chamber further noted that, per the contemporaneous communications sent by
Sabah to the Player, there were absences from the second team recorded on the following
dates and Sabah decided to apply the following sanctions:
−
−
11 April 2024 – second team training – imposition of 15% salary deduction
13 April 2024 – second team training – imposition of 15% salary deduction
pg. 20
REF. FPSD-16345
−
−
−
−
−
14 April 2024 – second team training – imposition of 15% salary deduction
15 April 2024 – second team match – imposition of 25% salary deduction
19 April 2024 – second team training – imposition of 15% salary deduction
20 April 2024 – second team training – imposition of 15% salary deduction
22 April 2024 – second team training and match – imposition of 35% salary
deduction
85. In light of the circumstances, and with particular attention to (i) how the decision to send
the Player to the second team on 9 April 2024 came about in the first place, as well as (ii)
the lack of clarity or evidence regarding a prior, duly conducted disciplinary procedure and
(iii) the fact that the Player disputed these sanctions – the accusations as well as the
application proceeding - in his letter dated 22 April 2024, the Chamber also had wellfounded doubts as to the propriety of the above-listed sanctions and questioned their
justification and proportionality.
86. Regrettably, the Player has failed to provide additional explanations and evidence to
further expand upon the contemporaneous communications exchanged with Sabah prior
to the Contract termination, though it was sufficiently clear to the Chamber from the
evidence in the file that the decision to send the Player to the second team in April initially
ended with his invitation to return to first team training on 6 May 2024.
87. It was also acknowledged via contemporaneous communications that the Player resumed
duties with Sabah on 8 May 2024, when he attended a training session with a rehab coach.
88. The Chamber further noted that, thereafter, the Player was once again ordered to
participate with the second team until 31 May 2024 due to his fitness level, to which the
Player again objected due to a lack of evidence. Nonetheless, from Sabah’s submissions, it
would appear that the Player was not considered to be absent during that time, and he
was further considered to be on official vacation from the end of May 2024 to the middle
of June 2024.
89. As such, the Chamber noted that there was another period of unauthorized absence as
from 21 June 2024 (training camp start date) through at least 4 July 2024 (as the Player
appeared to arrive in Slovenia for the training camp at some point between 2 and 6 July
2024; Sabah sent a letter to the Player re-directing him to Baku for a medical exam on 4
July 2024 and alleged that the Player arrived in Slovenia on 5 July 2024).
90. From that point onward, it appears from the evidence on file that the Player failed to heed
Sabah’s order to travel to Baku for the medical exam from 5 July 2024 through 21 July 2024.
Thus, after leaving the training camp in Slovenia, which was alleged to have occurred on 7
July 2024, the Player never resumed his duties with Sabah and, hence, had another period
of absence.
pg. 21
REF. FPSD-16345
91. As such, the Chamber observed that the Player’s absences from active duty were a
recurring matter.
92. In the Chamber’s opinion, the evidence on file demonstrated that the Player desired to
leave Sabah, as he seemed to have voiced his discontent throughout the last months in
which he was employed by Sabah. The Chamber also noted from the evidence on file that
the Club was also not willing to maintain the player [“you and me both know with this coach
Jearl is not going to play for Sabah”]. The Chamber’s observations in this respect were
reinforced by the various WhatsApp messages Sabah submitted as having been exchanged
between the Player, his representative, and the club. In the Chamber’s view, the tone and
content of certain messages (cf. paras. 26, 28 and 29 above) provided by Sabah indicated
that the situation was unsolvable between Sabah and the Player.
93. Indeed, while the Player demonstrated a certain degree of conciliatory intention in multiple
correspondences with the club, the Chamber found that this did not completely undermine
the above observation, especially when considering that the Player, at multiple points in
time, conditioned the performance of his duties under the Contract on certain demands
being met (including, but not limited to, immediate reinstatement to the first team, the
medical exam being held in Slovenia instead of Baku).
94. Of course, the Chamber took due note of the abundance of correspondence from Sabah
requesting the Player’s presence for training with the second and first teams, as well as
second team matches, training camp, and the pre-season medical exam. However, the
Chamber would be remiss not to note that Sabah’s actions were not entirely beyond
reproach throughout the last months of the Player’s employment, highlighting the
numerous salary deductions imposed as disciplinary measures without advance notice or
evidence of a prior procedure being held and the Player, in apparently the same act, being
sent to the second team as a result of the foregoing.
95. Therefore, in light of the totality of the circumstances, the Chamber was satisfied that both
parties, via their actions and during a prolonged period of time, contributed to the
undermining of the employment relationship and the mutual trust between employer and
employee; so much so that on 22 July 2024, both parties exchanged termination notices. In
this respect, the Chamber determined that, absent any evidence to precisely determine
the chronology of events that transpired on 22 July 2024, the exchange of termination
notices must be considered as having occurred simultaneously.
96. To conclude, the Chamber considered that the parties lost interest in pursuing the
Contract, and mutually departed therefrom on 22 July 2024. Hence, Sabah’s claim must be
rejected.
pg. 22
REF. FPSD-16345
d. Costs
97. The Chamber referred to art. 25 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which
“Procedures are free of charge where at least one of the parties is a player, coach, football agent,
or match agent”. Accordingly, the Chamber decided that no procedural costs were to be
imposed on the parties.
98. Likewise, and for the sake of completeness, the Chamber recalled the contents of art. 25
par. 8 of the Procedural Rules and decided that no procedural compensation shall be
awarded in these proceedings.
99. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 23
REF. FPSD-16345
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Sabah FK, is rejected.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 24
REF. FPSD-16345
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to art. 50 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before
the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this
decision.
NOTE RELATED TO THE PUBLICATION:
FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, FIFA may decide, at the request
of a party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an
anonymised or a redacted version (cf., art. 17 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football
Tribunal).
CONTACT INFORMATION
Fédération Internationale de Football Association – Legal & Compliance Division
396 Alhambra Circle, 6th floor, Coral Gables, Miami, Florida, USA 33134
legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
pg. 25